In recent years, the demand for developing contacts has increased and as a result individuals have had to find creative ways to store names, addresses and other information without cluttering their offices. The key balance is between access to contact information and the efficient use of limited desk space. A wide variety of other information may also need to be organized, e.g. recipes, notes, etc.
As the demand for capacity has increased, non-electronic storage devices in general, and organizer card holders in particular, have become substantially larger. With this increased size comes greater competition for available desk space. In response to these concerns, storage devices have been developed that extend vertically in order to reduce the need for encroachment on limited desk space.
Attempts to address the space limitation problem have resulted in development of a multiplicity of storage devices. Some of these storage devices provide for the efficient storage of printed material, but frequently present new space considerations of their own.
Historically, three fundamental design issues impact the storage device art. Storage devices need to be functionally designed to have a large storage capacity, to provide easy access and to be durable. To have a large storage capacity and be durable, many currently available storage devices are bulky and are made from heavy materials. See U.S. Pat. No. 274,604 to Hoppman, U.S. Pat. No. 868,118 to Pardee, and U.S. Pat. No. 4,222,190 to Solomon.
Other devices provide multiple compartments in an attempt to address the storage capacity problem. See U.S. Pat. No. 2,875,010 to Sola et al., and U.S. Pat. Nos. 3,246,940 and 3,326,615 to Karper. Others have even attempted to maximize the utility of multi-compartment storage devices by adapting them to have a single compartment, i.e. U.S. Pat. No. 1,104,711 to Shepard. Others have attempted to address the space limitation problem by using wall mounted structures. See U.S. Pat. No. 3,352,614 to Anderson. However, the aforementioned devices failed to afford the user easy access to the storage contents.
In an attempt to address this concern, devices were developed that gave the user easy access, but compromised durability and storage capacity. See U.S. Pat. No. 2,399,470 to Crane, U.S. Pat. No. 1,795,699 to Aurbach and U.S. Pat. No. 3,816,949 and U.S. Pat. No. Des. 227,309 to Laughlin. All of these devices are further limited by wear of the movable parts which results in diminished functionality over time. An attempt to address this problem resulted in devices that require a weight or fastening means to ensure that the device remains in an operable or inoperable position desired by the user. See U.S. Pat. No. 1,471,481 to Gobberdiel and U.S. Pat. No. 964,242 to Greenawalt.
None of these different iterations suggest a storage device that is well suited to (1) receive and display organizer cards horizontally in a removable tray, (2) store the cards vertically, and (3) economize on desk space by adapting the device to serve multiple functions.
There is a need for a storage device, particularly an organizer card file that is constructed in such a manner that the above objectives are achieved. There is additionally a need for a storage device that can be used to display its stored contents, and which is, at other times, capable of concealing its contents. A further need exists for a card file that is adaptable to display pictures or a clock or other decorative items when the stored contents are concealed. Yet another need exists for a card holder having a plate that holds the organizer card tray in place when the card file is in its closed position.